AyeDubbleYoo Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 I haven't really been following this, but did the PL ask for this WTO report? Why does it mention the takeover of Newcastle at all? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mouldy_uk Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Are we expecting to see this report today, or is just being released to certain organisations/individuals first? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest reefatoon Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Just remember gang, Mike is here FOREVER. Now just all sit back, relax and get ready for Steve's liquid football at the weekend, followed by him signing an 8 year contract. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmojorisin75 Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 why the fuck would the WTO report specifically reference the "confidential" takeover when it has absolutely fuck all to do with the initial claims? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mouldy_uk Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Just remember gang, Mike is here FOREVER. Now just all sit back, relax and get ready for Steve's liquid football at the weekend, followed by him signing an 8 year contract. I can see Mike doing that just to spite us Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 I think today we will know for sure, I’m still pretty confident, but not gonna lie after having to come to terms with the moral aspect of the takeover I was really happy to see Ashley gone. If this fucks up it’s the end of following us. Yeah, although I've been switched off for ages now, this would actually end me as a Newcastle fan in any sense of the word. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-421 Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Valid point posted in replies to Ian Dennis' tweet? Agree - thought this report was all about the SA/Qatar IP/Piracy thing and instigated well before the takeover. So why would it reference it at all? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stifler Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 I can’t see how the World Trade Organisation would recommend that the Premier League reject the takeover of NUFC, which is private international trade transaction. It would be against everything they are there to protect. I also can’t see how the report has been written for 2 years, yet they have a section in it relating to a rumoured transition that has only occurred within the last 2 months. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 why the fuck would the WTO report specifically reference the "confidential" takeover when it has absolutely fuck all to do with the initial claims? This is what I don't know either, did the PL ask for this report with specific reference to this takeover decision? If not I can't see why it even mentions the deal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chapo Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Well that’s that then. Off to YouTube to watch Alex Bruce highlights, reckon he’ll be fine in a back 3. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest reefatoon Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_R Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 But the takeover isn't by KSA, it's PIF Whose chairman owns the fucking country. Why are people so blind to this being an issue? Do people just have their heads in the sand? There's not a chance on earth this goes through. Zero. The directors' test says anyone who might have an influence over the club has to be squeaky clean, and not "reasonably" thought to have done anything like, I dunno, be involved in piracy. Can you think of anyone who has connections to PIF who this might apply to? I've been saying this for weeks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Prophet Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 I think this will go through still, I don’t see the pl rejecting money in the current state football is in Same. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 But the takeover isn't by KSA, it's PIF the chairman of PIF is the Crown Prince (who has a whole load of other jobs on paper in the government) and its the Public Investment Fund they're directly subordinate to KSA Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallowgate Toon Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Is beoutq genuinely shut down now, or has it just been reskinned? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ketsbaia Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 But the takeover isn't by KSA, it's PIF Whose chairman owns the fucking country. Why are people so blind to this being an issue? Do people just have their heads in the sand? There's not a chance on earth this goes through. Zero. The directors' test says anyone who might have an influence over the club has to be squeaky clean, and not "reasonably" thought to have done anything like, I dunno, be involved in piracy. Can you think of anyone who has connections to PIF who this might apply to? I've been saying this for weeks. Doesn’t fucking matter it’s about PIF being a separate legal entity. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thorpinho Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 People really aren't understanding this at all. Going on as if the contents of this report are some sort of surprise to the parties involved and like this is a moment of revelation because the press can finally read and quote it. The PL and those involved had this report over a month ago. It says bad things. The question is whether the KSA/PIF response can either evade it by "not being involved/not same entity" or they can offer resolutions to resolve the issues in the report that (again) they have already had for ages. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Is beoutq genuinely shut down now, or has it just been reskinned? It's down and out, until this is rejected then with nothing to lose it'll back on steroids. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slim Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 But the takeover isn't by KSA, it's PIF Whose chairman owns the fucking country. Why are people so blind to this being an issue? Do people just have their heads in the sand? There's not a chance on earth this goes through. Zero. The directors' test says anyone who might have an influence over the club has to be squeaky clean, and not "reasonably" thought to have done anything like, I dunno, be involved in piracy. Can you think of anyone who has connections to PIF who this might apply to? I've been saying this for weeks. Doesn’t fucking matter it’s about PIF being a separate legal entity. lol thats not how it works Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 People really aren't understanding this at all. Going on as if the contents of this report are some sort of surprise to the parties involved and like this is a moment of revelation because the press can finally read and quote it. The PL and those involved had this report over a month ago. It says bad things. The question is whether the KSA/PIF response can either evade it by "not being involved/not same entity" or they can offer resolutions to resolve the issues in the report that (again) they have already had for ages. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FloydianMag Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 But the takeover isn't by KSA, it's PIF Whose chairman owns the fucking country. Why are people so blind to this being an issue? Do people just have their heads in the sand? There's not a chance on earth this goes through. Zero. The directors' test says anyone who might have an influence over the club has to be squeaky clean, and not "reasonably" thought to have done anything like, I dunno, be involved in piracy. Can you think of anyone who has connections to PIF who this might apply to? I've been saying this for weeks. Doesn’t fucking matter it’s about PIF being a separate legal entity. lol thats not how it works Legally yes that’s how it works. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
OpenC Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Loads of new pages today This is proper exciting Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdckelly Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 I think this will go through still, I don’t see the pl rejecting money in the current state football is in if it were anybody but KSA maybe but with the beoutq shit which they've been trying to take action over for a while now. It would be a weird look for the premier league to try and take action against KSA earlier this year then just say welcome a little while later Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted June 16, 2020 Share Posted June 16, 2020 Loads of new pages today This is proper exciting Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts